The false handedness of the DNA molecule on Spetner's book should not be left unnoticed

--------------"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

Say what you want, but you can't deny that Spetner has a firm grasp of probability theory:

Quote

That [certain] proteins arose by random mutation is not only an unsupported conjecture, but to have these proteins evolve by random mutations defies the essence of probability that says that an event with too small a probability is unlikely to occur.

--------------Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Say what you want, but you can't deny that Spetner has a firm grasp of probability theory:

Quote

That [certain] proteins arose by random mutation is not only an unsupported conjecture, but to have these proteins evolve by random mutations defies the essence of probability that says that an event with too small a probability is unlikely to occur.

Awesome!

I look forward to Joe's co-authorship of the statistical methods section (see my sig) in the next edition.

--------------Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"... The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

What would the ID/creationist movement be without Granville Sewell? And what would he be without outlets not allowing comments?link

--------------"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

Casey Luskin isn't twiddling his thumbs in retirement. But neither is he accomplishing much. The DI's latest "please pay attention to us" newsletter reminds us all that he published a law review article complaining that teaching evolution is inextricably intertwined with "anti-religious activism."

This article comes to us by way of the Harv- nope. I mean Ya- no, not that either. Maybe the Stanf-... hmmmm. Oh, Trinity Law School. Which has a long-term goal of being approved by the ABA (in other words, yikes). But if its graduates have trouble passing the bar, at least they know they're shoveling money down the maw of the #2 institution on the list of "Most Devout Christian Law Schools."

The reason it's "intertwined" is largely because science deniers like them keep telling everyone that their dogma conflicts with the scientific conclusions. Keep doing that, and the percentage of educated people in their religions is going to drop. And, as far as I can tell, it's largely (maybe even mostly?) them doing it, not scientists as a group.

This article comes to us by way of the Harv- nope. I mean Ya- no, not that either. Maybe the Stanf-... hmmmm. Oh, Trinity Law School. Which has a long-term goal of being approved by the ABA (in other words, yikes).

Why did Waterloo come to my mind?

--------------"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

This article comes to us by way of the Harv- nope. I mean Ya- no, not that either. Maybe the Stanf-... hmmmm. Oh, Trinity Law School. Which has a long-term goal of being approved by the ABA (in other words, yikes).

Why did Waterloo come to my mind?

Um. This isn't the Mornington Crescent thread.

BTW "Waterloo" is a very risky move. People have been dismissed for playing "Waterloo" at the wrong time.

It was discussed at TSZ, but I don't know about here per se. Dreary old censorship accusation. They certainly don't have much imagination.

Not bad to remind us of crank magnetism in any case. ID may be remembered not only for demonizing evolutionary theory and anything associated with it, but for Phillip Johnson's HIV denials, along with Dembski's faith healing and anti-vax BS (Corny's managed to mangle some of that too--Darwinists claim that there are no risks from vaccines, or something along that line). The AGW conspiracy must be pointed out repeatedly, of course.

--------------"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

The story is one of redemption and enlightenment, as a cynic rethinks the tenets of materialism he previously took for granted. The book can serve as a helpful introduction to ID, as accessible (in its very different way) as Doug Axe's new book Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life Is Designed. The argument for design can be recondite and these two books together go a long distance to making it comprehensible to the most general of readers.

Obviously, Mr. Buff hasn't advanced the scientific case for ID. However he has done a service by offering a smart, often exciting story that is intellectually serious and spiritually earnest and that will, one hopes, place ultimate questions about man's place in the universe before a deservedly wide audience.

All science so far... except for the religion... and the fiction parts.

--------------Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

Klinghoffer doesn't seriously and earnestly want to imply anyboy else had or does he?

--------------"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."